UCC liquidated damages clause enforceability - which statement is actually accurate?
I'm reviewing a security agreement template and there's conflicting information about liquidated damages provisions under the UCC. Our legal team provided four different interpretations and I need to know which one is actually correct before we finalize this commercial lending package. The debtor is a manufacturing company with equipment collateral worth about $850K, and we're trying to structure the liquidated damages clause properly in case of default. I've seen different approaches in other UCC-1 filings but want to make sure we're compliant with current Article 9 requirements. Has anyone dealt with liquidated damages enforceability issues recently? What's the accurate legal standard we should be following?
33 comments
Join the conversation
Anthony Young
Liquidated damages under UCC Article 9 must be reasonable in light of the anticipated or actual harm caused by breach. The key test is whether the amount was a reasonable forecast of just compensation at the time the contract was made. Courts will void penalties but enforce genuine liquidated damages provisions.
0 coins
Charlotte White
•This is correct - the reasonableness standard applies both at contract formation and actual breach. I've seen too many agreements get struck down because they were clearly punitive rather than compensatory.
0 coins
Admin_Masters
•What's considered 'reasonable' though? Is there a percentage threshold or does it vary by industry and collateral type?
0 coins
Matthew Sanchez
Actually had a similar issue last month with a $600K equipment financing deal. The liquidated damages clause got challenged in court and the judge applied the reasonableness test. Make sure your clause isn't punitive - that's the main thing that'll get you in trouble.
0 coins
Aurora Lacasse
•What happened in your case? Did the clause get enforced or thrown out?
0 coins
Matthew Sanchez
•It got enforced because we could show the amount was based on actual projected losses from depreciation and remarketing costs. Documentation is key.
0 coins
Ella Thompson
Before you finalize anything, I'd suggest using Certana.ai's document verification tool to cross-check your security agreement against your UCC-1 filing. I discovered some inconsistencies in my liquidated damages provisions when I uploaded both documents - saved me from potential enforceability issues later.
0 coins
Aurora Lacasse
•How does that work exactly? Does it check the legal language or just the basic details?
0 coins
Ella Thompson
•It verifies that all the terms match between documents and flags potential inconsistencies. Really helpful for complex commercial deals where small discrepancies can cause big problems.
0 coins
JacksonHarris
The UCC doesn't actually specify liquidated damages rules - those come from general contract law principles. But since you're dealing with secured transactions, make sure the clause doesn't conflict with Article 9's disposition requirements after default.
0 coins
Anthony Young
•Good point about the disposition requirements. The liquidated damages can't circumvent the debtor's right to surplus from collateral sale.
0 coins
Jeremiah Brown
•Wait, so if we foreclose and sell the equipment, the liquidated damages are separate from the sale proceeds? That seems like double recovery.
0 coins
Royal_GM_Mark
I'm confused about this whole thing. If we have good collateral, why do we even need liquidated damages? Isn't the security interest enough protection?
0 coins
Anthony Young
•Liquidated damages can cover things like administrative costs, lost opportunity, and depreciation that might not be fully recovered through collateral disposition.
0 coins
JacksonHarris
•Plus equipment values can drop fast, especially in specialized industries. Liquidated damages provide additional certainty.
0 coins
Amelia Cartwright
Court decisions on this vary significantly by jurisdiction. Some states are more willing to enforce liquidated damages clauses than others. You really need state-specific guidance for a deal this size.
0 coins
Aurora Lacasse
•We're filing in Delaware but the equipment is located in three different states. Which jurisdiction's law would apply?
0 coins
Amelia Cartwright
•Usually the law specified in your security agreement, but equipment location can complicate things. Definitely check with local counsel.
0 coins
Chris King
Had a nightmare with this last year!!! Our liquidated damages clause was like 50% of the loan amount and the judge laughed it out of court. Now I keep them under 10% of original principal as a rule of thumb.
0 coins
Charlotte White
•50% sounds excessive unless you had some really unusual circumstances. What kind of equipment was it?
0 coins
Chris King
•Specialized manufacturing equipment that was pretty much worthless to anyone else. But still, the court said it was punitive not compensatory.
0 coins
Rachel Clark
The enforceability really depends on whether you can prove the damages were difficult to calculate at contract formation. Courts are more lenient when actual damages would be hard to determine.
0 coins
Anthony Young
•Exactly - the uncertainty of damages is a key factor. If you can easily calculate actual harm, liquidated damages are harder to justify.
0 coins
Zachary Hughes
Whatever you do, document your reasoning for the liquidated damages amount. I always include a memo in the file explaining how we calculated the figure and why it's reasonable compensation.
0 coins
Aurora Lacasse
•That's smart. Do you include that documentation in the actual security agreement or keep it separate?
0 coins
Zachary Hughes
•Separate memo for the file. Including it in the agreement might make it look like you're trying too hard to justify an unreasonable amount.
0 coins
Mia Alvarez
Just ran into this issue myself and ended up using Certana.ai to double-check that my security agreement language matched my UCC filing. Found some inconsistencies in how I described the collateral that could have affected the liquidated damages enforceability. Really saved me some headaches.
0 coins
Aurora Lacasse
•Good catch. How long did that verification process take?
0 coins
Mia Alvarez
•Just uploaded the PDFs and got results in minutes. Much faster than manual comparison and catches things you might miss.
0 coins
Carter Holmes
Bottom line - make sure your liquidated damages clause serves a legitimate business purpose and isn't just trying to scare the debtor into compliance. Courts can smell penalty clauses from a mile away.
0 coins
Charlotte White
•This is the key point. The clause has to be about compensation for actual anticipated harm, not punishment for breach.
0 coins
Admin_Masters
•How do you prove 'legitimate business purpose' though? Just through documentation or do you need expert testimony?
0 coins
Mateo Sanchez
Thanks for all the detailed responses everyone! This is really helpful. Based on what I'm reading, it sounds like the key is ensuring our liquidated damages amount is genuinely compensatory rather than punitive. For our $850K equipment deal, I'm thinking we should calculate based on actual projected costs like remarketing expenses, storage, administrative overhead, and expected depreciation during the disposition process. Would it make sense to cap it at something like 15-20% of the original loan amount, or should we focus more on documenting our cost projections regardless of percentage? Also planning to use that Certana.ai tool a few of you mentioned to verify consistency between our security agreement and UCC-1 filing.
0 coins